Allocation of conquered territories.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Has this been discussed yet?

I would like to be able to allocate territories to certain countries(allies or possible allies).

Say I conquer the UK with the axis but decide to give Egypt and all the English possesions in the Med. to Italy,

Or I conquer Yugoslavia and give Slovenia and Trieste to Italy, raising the chance of an Italian DOW on the allies.

This way you can improve diplomatic relations,increase the economic potential of allies like France,Italy or the US or make tactical moves like giving an undefendable territory to a neutral country,saving it from hostile occupation.

So, what do you think?

[Edwin P.]

Interesting idea, I wonder if the use of diplomatic chits will allow for this. Thus giving away territories will involve a cost to the giver as well as a benefit.

Although you mention Trieste and Slovenia, I would only allow it for complete territies - ie Vichy France, Vichy Algeria, Egypt, Spain and not for individual hexes. If implemented I would also have a higher cost for giving away certain territories -ie the cost for the UK to give Gibraltar to the US might be so high as to be impossible or simply not allow it; ie Germany can't give Warsaw to Italy.

In the old SC1 thread JerseyJohn and myself had a thread on Germany influencing Spain by giving Spain: Vichy Algeria. In summary we concluded that such an action would increase Spanish willingness to join the war but anger Italy, possibly leanding them to withdraw from the Axis.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Yes, maybe trieste was a bad example.

I would like it to be implemented though,would really make things a lot easier.

When I want to give some more territory to Italy in SC1 I have to make sure an Italian unit takes in the capital,sometimes slowing the capitulation of a country(Vichy) by a turn or two.

Good conclusion, Italy might have sucked in WW2 but I don't think Spain would have been much better.

[Edwin P.]

Also, you have to keep in mid play balance and historical realities when adding such a feature.

There are several ways to do this:

1. Adjust the cost of diplomatic chits for a specific transfer.

2. Not allowing certain transfers.

3. Have a chance that your government rejects the transfer.

Example: UK tries to Transfer Gibraltor to the US (Or SPAIN !)and purchases a diplomatic chit to do so; however, the British Parliment rejects the transfer and the transfer does not occur although the UK player has spent MPP to attempt it.

What is the chance for the British Parliment to approve the transfer? I would say 90% if the Germans control London or Manchester, but only 10% if they do not. The chance for the parliment to approve the transfer of UK Controled Vichy Algeria would likely be 95% regardless of the situation as the UK government has no historical ties to North Africa.

[JerseyJohn]

Great subject.

Yes, Edwin, myself and Shaka Carthage were the main culprits in discussing this sort of idea. As Edwin said, we pretty much centered on which country was seeking which terriroty from either the UK or France.

We never discussed chopping a conquered nation up and dividing it but of course that makes a great deal of sense and is perfectly valid historically.

As a rule of thumb, Mussolini wanted southern France, Swizerland, Tunisia, Yugosalvia and Greece. That was his Europe proper idea from the 1920s. He also wanted an African Empire that would have incluced Egypt (as a protectorate) and the Sudan.

Franco wanted Gibraltar and French Morocco. Naturally if Algeria were dangled he'd have enjoyed having that as well. He was realistic enough to not jump into the war because his own control of Spain was too shaky in 1940, the Spanish Civil War having ended in 1939. Another consideration is he lost considerable faith in Hitler when he signed the agreement with Stalin.

The rest is anyone's guess. Hitler was strictly an opportunist, of course. He had no interest in Africa before the war because he considered it inhabited by subhumans -- sorry, that's the nazi view, not my own. He changed his opinion later, when he learned a little about what was needed for an A-bomb and was told the Belgian Congo was loaded with uranium. Well, Belium was suddenly part of Germany and that made the Congo German as well, like the oil and rubber rich Dutch East Indies.

There's plenty of room for interesting speculation in all of this. What if Hitler had been smart enough to set up a protectorate government in the Ukraine? Wilhelm II did that in 1917, giving the entire region good reason to toss out the agents of the Czar.

I hope these ideas lead somewhere. There'd need to be a territory, concept.

Hubert, come on, what's another few million lines of that machine code gibberish among friends!

[Edwin P.]

Protectorate in the Ukraine?

mmm - Interesting.

Perhaps:

Benefit: No Partisans in this region, as it is no longer part of Russia and

Cost: Use of a Diplomatic Chit costing 500MPP

That said, I like Rosevelt45's concept as it would give you another use for diplomatic chits. The key to implementing it though is that it has to be simple and reasonably historically possible.

As Jersey said, the Axis could influence Spain by offering them Gibraltar (however, a Spanish Gibraltar should be an open port while Spain is Neutral and allow ships of both sides to transit the straits) and Vichy Algeria (this game does not have Morroco as a seperate territory - but it should !).

Ideally, I would like to see nations (Germany and the UK) have the option to use territory to influence or aid their allies. However, their should be a cost to this.

Example: Germany Giving Vichy France, Vichy Algeria, or even egypt to Spain influences Spain but should reduce Italian War Readiness by a semi-random amount, and if it drops low enough they withdraw from the war. Naturally you don't know exactly what this trigger is.

Withdraw from the War? Or should I say limit their participation? - perhaps Italian Units can not operate to German controlled cities, effectively reducing their ability to reinforce German lines or new units can't enter German controlled territories until Italy rejoins the war effort.

Example: Giving Gibraltar to the US or Spain is possible but the British MPs might not approve it.

Example: Germany giving control over Egypt, Iraq or Vichy Syria to Italy might have a positive effect on Italy but a negative effect on relations with Turkey. Giving 2 or 3 to Italy might bring Turkey into the war on the Allied side.

Giving these territories (Egypt and Vichy Syria) to Turkey, might anger Italy - perhaps causing them to withdraw from the war (especially if the allies are secretly spending diplomatic chits to encourage this). Naturally if this occurs, the German player might have to spend some diplomatic chits to bring them back into the war.

[ September 17, 2004, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Edwin P.]

Returning to Diplomacy:

I would like to see this feature offer three possibilities:

1. Affect War Readiness/Axis & Allied Leaning

2. Give Territories

3. Other Options

------ Passage through the Straits to the Black Sea for you fleet

------ Give a unit to a Neutral Nation (ie Spain, Sweden)

------ Activate Partisans in a country (ie Norway, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Spain, Turkey, Iraq)

[JerseyJohn]

Edwin

Excellent!

I'd limit both Spain and Turkey as to how much could be either offered to or accepted by them. They were both too weak to affect much beyond their own borders. Egypt, I think, should definitely be of Italian administrative interest only. I doubt that Germany would even have wanted to directly administer either Germany or the Sudan.

Spain might not have been able to administer Algeria even if it were allotted to it. On the other hand, Gibraltar and French Morocco would have been perfectly feasible for it.

Syria would have been feasible for Turkey as well, Iraq -- possibly. I think Algeria would have had rebellions against Spain and Iraq would have had them against Turkey. Italy, though unimpressive in it's combat performance, undoubtedly had a much higher ability to administer territories than either Spain or Turkey.

Another thing that could be more accurately reflected in SC2 might be the effect of bad administration. Have the players able to preset the administrative abilities of varios countries.

Gemany's historical setting would be low; it went in and committed attrocities and turned the populations against it. Production was low and so was the active participation of occupied populations. Raise their administrative abilities, no attrocities, and the % of plunder goes down in exchange for higher productivity in the occupied territorities.

The effect of making places like the Ukraine into semi-autonomous protectorates would be increased manpower for the army -- they would be the same as Rumanian units, perhaps 4 or 5 armies, which would be significant despited their not having high tech levels. And, of course, partisan activity would drop or vanish completely.

The dividing line would be at Minsk and Smolensk in the north and Rostov in the east.

In a WW2 setting I think the Ukrain would be the only area where this would have been feasible and worth representing.

In 1917, Germany did this for both the Ukraine and the Baltic States. Finland broke away from Russia on it's own -- Mannerheim's first campaigns -- and was very pro-German.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

Returning to Diplomacy:

I would like to see this feature offer three possibilities:

1. Affect War Readiness/Axis & Allied Leaning

2. Give Territories

3. Other Options

------ Passage through the Straits to the Black Sea for you fleet

------ Give a unit to a Neutral Nation (ie Spain, Sweden)

------ Activate Partisans in a country (ie Norway, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Spain, Turkey, Iraq)

Yes excellent,

thoughI had another proposal some time ago, making it possible to send ultimatums and peace proposals to countries or sides.

But there ware some disagreements about that,so if these things are implemented I would be thrilled .

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

JJ, I agree, but I would represent these problems by a higher cost.

For example :-Spain gets Gibraltar and French Marocco, the cost is fairly low.

-Turkey gets Syria,a territory that had not long ago been seperated from the Ottomanian Empire, the cost is pretty high and maybe the allies could do something like spend a chit or sth on that territory, raising the chance of partisans or lowering the infrastructure and the moral(e?) of the units in the area.

Also,about infrastructure.

Will eningeneers be able to improve the infrastructure of certain areas or will this work like a tech area?

[Edwin P.]

The effect of making places like the Ukraine into semi-autonomous protectorates would be increased manpower for the army -- they would be the same as Rumanian units, perhaps 4 or 5 armies, which would be significant despited their not having high tech levels. And, of course, partisan activity would drop or vanish completely.

Jersey John, how would you set it up so that the German player did not pursue this option every time and play balance was maintained?

Example:

Requirements: Axis Control of: XXXX, XXXX, XXXX

Benefit: No Partisans, Ukraine (cities server as a #10 supply source) as a Minor Ally and larger force pool due to ability to purchase Ukrainian units.

Cost: Diplomatic Chit + No Production from Ukrainian Cities, as production is diverted to to repair the ravages of war and maintain good relations with the populace.

[Edwin P.]

JerseyJohn and Roosevelt45, any comments on the following proposal:

1. Each Territory in the Med given to Turkey or Spain by Germany reduces Italy's war readiness by a semi-random amount.

Example:

Vichy France: 50% to 80%

Vichy Algeria: 30% to 50%

Egypt: 40% to 60%

Syria: 10% to 20%

Malta: 30% to 50%

If Germany gives Vichy France and Vichy Algeria to Spain there is a chance (80% to 130%) that Italy will withdraw from the war.

If Germany gives Vichy France, Vichy Algeria and Malta to Spain then there is a chance (110% to 180%) that Italy withdraws from the war.

The allies can increase this chance by 5% to 20% through the use of diplomatic chits. Germany can reduce this negative effect by spending diplomatic chits.

I think that this concept would add a bit of strategy and risk to the transfer of territories among allies and neutrals.

2. Italy Withdraws from the War.

Option 1. Italian Land anbd Air Units may only move or operate towards or in Italian controlled territory. Thus Italian units in Russia will not advance and newly built Italian Units will may not be deployed to help Germany defend its borders.

or

Option 2. Italian units may not operate to German controlled Cities. Thus slowing down the movement of reinforcements to the front lines.

or

Option 3. Italy becomes Neutral. All Italian units outside of Italian territory operate back to Italy.

[ September 17, 2004, 09:01 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[JerseyJohn]

Roosevelt45 and EdwinP

Great ideas and very complicated details to be worked out.

Edwin, I agree about Syria, it might easily have been reassimulated into the Turkish realm. It wouldn't have cooperated, of course, but I think Turkey could have held it.

Regarding the assignment of territories, I don't believe anything, under any circumstances, in the central and east mediteranean would have been have turned over to the Spanish! There would have been as much justification in giving Malta to Spain as there would have been in giving Gibraltar to Italy!

Spain would have wanted Gibraltar because, in truth, it's part of Spain! It has no value at all except as a strategic point controling the western med. Which, of course, is significant.

Malta, similarly, has no value in the game other than as part of Britain's three part maritime link in the Mediteranean. Unlike the situation in the game, if any of the three were to have been captured by the Axis, the UK Mediteranean convoys would have ceased and further anti convoy action in that area would have been pointless, there would have been no convoys to attack, they'd have been going around the Cape of Good Hope.

Historically that was really a much more important route than the Mediteranean convoy route, which was mainly for fast military shipments in fast moving transports, not moving raw materials in slow freighters.

All of the ideas about lowered enthusiasm to the cause makes sense with the consideration that Spain is limited to interests in the west and Turkey in the east. Malta, no matter what, would have gone to Italy ONLY!

I think this is pretty close to being formed into something.

The only part missing now is 50,000 pages of computer code to put it into the game. Hubert can have that done in no time at all!

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Very good ideas, indeed(in my eyes at least)

Though I must agree with JJ on the fact that giving Malta and/or Vichy Algeria to Spain should be a very difficult, if not impossible Procedure.

Don't forget that Spain had just had a civil war and was from a military point of view, no match for Italy.Germany would not have risked losing Italy as an ally.I do think however, that we should be able to risk it if we'd like to.

Also, if the UK has surrendered, Italy can easily occupy Malta before any Spanish troops arrive at the island.

I just hope that Hubert is reading this and is considering to implement these features.

[Edwin P.]

Jersey John and Roosevelt45,

I agree with your take on Malta. That is why negative impact of such a move so high, 30% to 50%. You could even raise it to 80% to 110%. (thus a chance that it causes Italy to Immediately withdraw from the war).

The key is that historically Germany would not have done so and the AI would never do it.

But if a human player does it, without thinking of the conseqences them let him do it and experience the effect of Italy withdrawing from the war. Now the foolish Human controlled Germany will have to spend a lot on diplomatic chits to coak Italy back into the war.

I think that you learn about history by allowing players to make mistakes and seeing their effect than by not allowing such actions.

Also, I think that on item ignored in Algeria is the partisans, I would like to see the Allies able to activate Algerian Partisans with a diplomatic chit if control is transfered to another country such as Spain or Italy.

In addition, Germany should be able to transfer Vichy Algeria to Turkey - BUT - this would have a major negative impact on relations with BOTH SPAIN AND ITALY. (think Spain joins Allies and itally withdraws from the War). Of course the AI would never do it, but a foolish human may try and this would cause him a lot of headaches if he did so.

[ September 17, 2004, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[JerseyJohn]

That's a good point. I also believe Roosevelt45 has a good idea about Italy sending troops to occupy Malta regardless of what Germany decides regarding it's occupation by Spain (or even Turkey).

I just can't imagine the issue ever even coming up, unless Italy hadn't entered the war in the first place and Spain did. Not a bad alternate scenario idea -- it would assume a fall from power of the fascists prior to 1939; perhaps the result of a military failure in Ethiopia. Truth is, that war was not a walkover for Italy till it resorted to poison gas dropped from aircraft -- Ethiopia had no air force at all.

Regarding the earlier point about Ukrainia and and levelling the game play. That would take some doing. The truth, in my opinion, is that such a move by Germany would practically have sealed the USSR's fate.

Perhaps the countermeasure would be to not allow a Soviet surrender. The USSR would need to be completely conquered on the visible map and Germany would afterwards have to keep a hefty occupation force in it's non-Ukranian conquered zones. Historically, Hitler was planning to occupy European Russia with 55 divisions.

A smaller occupation force would allow partisans. Also, it would be assumed that the war is still on past the Urals, maybe Germany would be required to have two armies in each sector, North-Center-South along with a corps, either German, Hungarian, or Rumanian in each major city with Leningrad becoming part of Finland and having to be occupied by at least one Finnish corps.

[Edwin P.]

JerseyJohn, I like your take on balancing the Game with Ukrainia.

With no surrender Germany does not get plunder from conquering Russia and must keep a large garrison force in Russia.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

Jersey John and Roosevelt45,

I agree with your take on Malta. That is why negative impact of such a move so high, 30% to 50%. You could even raise it to 80% to 110%. (thus a chance that it causes Italy to Immediately withdraw from the war).

The key is that historically Germany would not have done so and the AI would never do it.

But if a human player does it, without thinking of the conseqences them let him do it and experience the effect of Italy withdrawing from the war. Now the foolish Human controlled Germany will have to spend a lot on diplomatic chits to coak Italy back into the war.

I think that you learn about history by allowing players to make mistakes and seeing their effect than by not allowing such actions.

Also, I think that on item ignored in Algeria is the partisans, I would like to see the Allies able to activate Algerian Partisans with a diplomatic chit if control is transfered to another country such as Spain or Italy.

In addition, Germany should be able to transfer Vichy Algeria to Turkey - BUT - this would have a major negative impact on relations with BOTH SPAIN AND ITALY. (think Spain joins Allies and itally withdraws from the War). Of course the AI would never do it, but a foolish human may try and this would cause him a lot of headaches if he did so.

Exactly, I wouldn't do it, but it should be possible.

And the consequences should be as realistic as humanly(or virtually) possible.

JJ,I don't agree that the USSR would have been lost by such a move, but just imagine what would have happened if the Germans hadn't treated the local population so cruel and if they also promised post-war independance to Bellorussia, the Baltic states, the states in the Caucasus, and all of the -stans in the east.

Stalin was hated enough to make half of the country collaborate if they were offered a better choice.

This is about the same as you described but not only used in Ukrania but all across the USSR. I believe such an action would have definitely killed Stalin's regime.

The only problem with that is that when the USSR surrenders you will definitely surpass(or whatever) the maximum number of countries allowed by the engine.

[Edwin P.]

Now how to implement these ideas,

Idea 1: Transfer of Territories

---------------------------------------------

First,

Diplomatic Action for Transfer of Conquered Territory. Go to Diplomatic Map and select a territory that you controlv and select one of the available highlighted transfer actions in the right hand column:

Axis: To Italy, To Germany, To Spain, To Turkey

Thus an Axis Power (Italty or Germany ) could only transfer territory to Italy, Germany, Spain or Turkey.

Allies: To US, To UK, To Russia, To France, To Spain, To Turkey

---------------------------------------------

Second,

For selected countries a table of Territories, the negative effect of transfering each conquered territory to another nation by an ally , the random adjustment assigned to this effect, the positive effect of receiving that territory, the randomness associated with this, and the chance for this nation to accept the transfer.

Example: Table for Italy

Territory: Italy, Algeria (30, 20, 10, 10, 45)

Thus the penalty for transferring Algeria to Spain on Italian Readiness is 31% to 50% (30,20), if Germany transfers Algeria to Italy then Italy becomes 11% to 20% (10,10) more pro Germany, and there is a 45% (45) that Italy will accept this territory.

Example: Table for Turkey

Turkey, Syria (20,10,10,5,99)

If Germany transfer Vichy Syria to Italy then relations with Turkey suffer a 21% to 30% penalty. If Germany transfers the territory to Turkey then Turkey becomes 11% to 15% more pro Axis and is 99% likely to accept the Territory of Syria.

Example: Table for US

US, Gibraltar (0,0,0,0, 5%)

If the UK attempts to transfer Gibraltar to the USA their will be no effecton on US relations and the US is only 5% likely to accept it.

Eample: Table for Spain

Spain, Gibraltar (30,50,10,20,100)

Basically if the UK transfers Gibraltar to the US then relations with Spain plunge by 31% to 80%, if they transfer it to Spain then Spanish relations increase by 11% to 30% and Spain will accept this gift 100% of the time.

------------------------------------------------

Third,

A table for the Giving Country listing each territory they can transfer, if conquered by them and the chance for this being approved by their government.

Example: Table for UK

Gibraltar - 5

Egypt - 30

Syria - 90

Thus the UK MPs will only approve the transfer of Gibraltar 5% of the time. A player can attempt this event, but it will most likely result in a futile expenditure of a diplomatic chit.

How does it work?

Step 1: Expend Diplomatic Chit

Step 2: Attempt Tansfer

----------- Does your government Approve? If No Then Popup Note ("Prime Minister, your proposal bas been defeated and the papers are calling for you to step down") and Exit

----------- Does the receiving government Accept? - If No Then Popup Note ("Generalismo Franco Rejects Your Offer") and Exit

Step 3: Calculate effects on Relations

---- If Italy Withdraws from War then Italian Land Units may only move towards Italian Territory and operate to Italian controlled hexes. Italian Navy units many only move towards/in the Mediterrean.

What do you mean your forces won't advance. The German High Command orders you to Attack.

Step 4: Exit

-------------------------------------------

NOTE: Tables 2 and 3: Can be combined into one table/array:

Italy, Algeria, 30, 20, 10, 10, 75, 5

Number 1: Negative Effect or territory being given to another country by allied country (30%)

Number 2: Random Factor for #2 (so effect is really 31% to 50%)

Number 3: Postivie Effect of receiving this territory from an Ally. (10%)

Number 4: Random factor for #3 (10%) = 11% to 20%

Number 5: Chance that Italy will accept the territory if given to it. (ie 75%)

Number 6: Chance that Italian government and populace will agree to give the territory away. (ie 5%)

[ September 18, 2004, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[JerseyJohn]

Edwin

Glad you agree with that balancing idea, I hadn't thought about the absense of plunder but sure, that's a factor and having to occupy it on a permanent war footing would certainly act as a sort of handicap. Of course Germany would still be strong turning west to face UK and USA but there would still be that back door to watch.

Roosevelt45

You led that up to an interesting dilemma!

Agreed, that policy would have worked throught Russia.

The main problem to these things was Hitler and the inner fanatical nazis and their racist insane beliefs. Hitler envisioned all of Eastern Europe as some sort of feudal expanse with landed Teuton farmer lords ruling over masses of uneducated and mulish enslaved slavs.

If there were a way of bypassing that historical truth and making it a factor in game terms the result would be extremely interesting. The various Russian minorities, as you say, did deeply hate the Soviet regime. The only thing holding it together was their fear was much greater than their hatred.

As Edwin brought up regarding the Ukrainia idea, there would need to be something to counter balance this or there simply isn't an Eastern Front and the War in Russia itself probably ends in a single season with the Germans accepted as liberators from the Black Sea to the Baltic.

[Edwin P.]

Of course Germany would still be strong turning west to face UK and USA but there would still be that back door to watch.

Especially if the chance for partisans was affected by the number of Axis units in Russia, and the number of unoccupied or Russian controlled Cities AND you had chance per turn for a 2nd Siberian Transfer acccompanied by US Troops!

Second Siberian Transfer After 1943 if Germany has conquered all Russian Cities.

1. Russian player has the option to delay this second transfer each turn until an opportune moment. The longer he waits the stronger Germany becomes, but also the more reinforcements his Siberian forces can receive from the USA.

2. US can affect the size of this 2nd transfer by sending MPPs to Russia throgh Alaska or Exiting Units off the Western Map Edge via a Siberian Transfer Tile.

3. Russian player can decide to have 2nd Siberian Transfer units appear in North, Central or Southern Russia. Once this decision is made the transfer occurs X turns later at this location.

[ September 17, 2004, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[JerseyJohn]

Edwin,

I'd say that's brilliant except it isn't. It's extremely Brilliant!

Yes, that's a great idea. I'd love to see it. And it would make Roosevelt's idea about expanding the Axis Protectorate option to all of Russia much more appealing.

What it amounts to now is that the game would be played, using these options, with the idea that the USSR can indeed be defeated quickly, but not conquered. Instead it would be a smouldering fire waiting to rekindle later in the game, especially if Germany fails to leave a very large garrison to watch it's eastern approaches.

At first I was lukewarm on these things regarding their SC2 possibilities but now I think they're really great.

I strongly suspect that Hubert will cut in at any moment and announce he loves them too and is planning to use all of it!

Uhhh, any moment and announce that he'll, uhh ...

[SeaMonkey]

This is the "epitome" of "What If".

Beautiful

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Excellent!

This way there can be some nasty surprises for the axis player post-soviet-'defeat'.

Hubert, pleeeeaaase consider this, at least as an option.

[Retributar]

Yes...Interesting idea...would work if the Russians don't give up ground too near the 'Sea Of Okhotsk' or 'The Bering Sea'.

If they do...then by then, the Russians may have been too badly beaten to be worth saving and/or any Allied invasion may become much more dangerous/difficult!.

It may also mean that the invasion of Normandy or Main-Land Europe would need to be postponed or forces slated for that theatre to be re-assigned in another manner.

Also the Americans---like the Germans might also have great difficulty dealing with the Russian climate. You will need to send the Canuck's there...as they are mostly already acclimated for this type of weather!. Back in the old days when i lived in Canada...winter temperatures would commonly go down to -40F( for 2-3 weeks or more) or sometimes even colder,...not just anyone can work or operate in that environment .

The weather in Canada during the last 2 decades or more has since eased up considerably...it's much more milder these days.